Who shut down the Government?

[89Hen]

Thomas Sowell.

So well is a moron

Racists

[Ibanez]

I can't believe we're still talking about this. It happened. Time for blame is over. Here is a better question: Who is trying to re-open the government?

[Gil Dobie]

Obamadoesn'tcare

[CAA Flagship]

Obama hates white people.

[TheDancinMonarch]

Shouldn't the number be 536?

435 in the House
100 in the Senate
1 in the White House

Actually 3 House seats are vacant. The other 432 plus the Senate and White House are occupied. But by vacant people.

[DSUrocks07]

If Obamacare is the "law of the land", isn't the Sequester the law of the land as well? Doesn't stop the Dems from trying to run roughshod over it.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/201 ... own-debate

[mrklean]

Obama hates white people.

So he hates his Mother and Grandparents who raised him as a boy?

Get another Tune Ruch Limbaugh nut hugger

[Skjellyfetti]

Both sides contributed to it... but, House Republicans exacerbated the situation exponentially.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wpLlJOc4ndE[/youtube]

Two weeks ago, as Congress prepared for a government shutdown fight, House Republicans changed parliamentary rules so as to prevent any member of the House from being able to bring up for a vote the Senate version of a government funding bill.

House Republicans acknowledge that under a rarely used rule, if the Senate rejects a motion to go to conference to work out differences between the House and Senate on legislation – as Senate Democrats did - any House Member may be able move to concur with the Senate amendment, meaning they could bring the Senate legislation to the floor of the House for a vote.

Before the government shutdown, Republicans changed the rule to give that authority to House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Virginia, or his designee for this legislation.

“It basically prevents [Minority] Leader [Nancy] Pelosi from hijacking the floor since the Senate refused to go to conference,” a House GOP aide told CNN. “The Senate refused the House's request to go to conference and rather than even considering the House amendments, the Senate Majority Leader went so far as to just summarily table them.”

The move was little noticed until over the weekend, when Rep. Chris van Hollen, D-Maryland, the ranking Democrat on the House Budget Committee, raised an objection to the rule change on the floor of the House in a Youtube video that has gone somewhat viral, since accruing more than 600,000 hits. You can watch that video here.

“It’s a big deal,” van Hollen tells CNN in an e-mail. “Under the Rules of the House, in the very particular parliamentary situation we find ourselves in (i.e. disagreement between House and Senate amendments on the bill) ANY member of the House, as a matter of privilege, could have called up the Senate amendments for a vote (because the Rules were written to try to expedite the resolution of differences between the two houses when there was a majority of each house in favor of a particular resolution).”

That said, van Hollen continues, “On October 1st, the R's passed a Rule to change the Standing Rules of the House so only Cantor or his designee could bring up Senate bill for a vote. I am told that we never played with this Rule when we were last in Majority and we are looking into the earlier history of this matter. In other words, they shut down the government and then changed the House Rules to keep it shut down.”

House Republicans see the issue differently, saying that their rule change simply ensures that what they see as the Senate’s refusal to negotiate is not rewarded with control of the House floor.

“The House acted in good faith to open up negotiations with Senate Democrats but Majority Leader Harry Reid dismissed the idea of bipartisan talks,” said Doug Andres, spokesman for the majority on the House Rules Committee. “That partisan refusal to negotiate should not be rewarded with control of the House floor. The easiest way to settle this is for both sides to sit down and finally talk.”

Republicans argue that the rule allowing members of the House to bring up Senate bills in such a situation was traditionally used by committee chairmen to quickly dispose of amendments in disagreement between the House and Senate back when that was a commonly used procedure, before 1996. They say they’re unaware of another instance where this practice - which wasn't codified as a rule until 1999, they argue - was used by another member other than a committee chair.

House Republicans argue that they have plenty of examples of the Democrats implementing even more stringent rules changes when Pelosi controlled the House, complaints that can be seen in this memo.

The rule changes tend to be complicated and confusing – “That section 151(e)(1) and section 151(f)(1) of the Trade Act of 1974 shall not apply in the case of the bill (H.R. 5724) to implement the United States-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement,” for example, was a Democrat-pushed rule change that took the US-Colombia Trade Promotion agreement off the "fast track" procedures, meaning that Congress would be able to amend or veto whatever the president negotiated.

http://thelead.blogs.cnn.com/2013/10/14 ... use-floor/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[blueballs]

To quote another empty chair leftist icon, "What difference does it make?"

There is one thing that has emerged yet again from the stalemate and that is the occupant of the "Spite House" is not a leader, has no interest in concensus building, is not president of all the people, and is nothing more than a partisan hack.

A true leader would have already forged a strong enough relationship with the leaders and members of both parties that he could have called them together and reached a compromise and averted all of this because of the respect he would have built.

0bama doesn't know what leadership is, what compromise is, what relationships across the aisle are, nor does he care about any of that. All he is is an ideologue, easily the worst president in my lifetime which stretches abck to the Eisenhower administration.

[Grizalltheway]

To quote another empty chair leftist icon, "What difference does it make?"

There is one thing that has emerged yet again from the stalemate and that is the occupant of the "Spite House" is not a leader, has no interest in concensus building, is not president of all the people, and is nothing more than a partisan hack.

A true leader would have already forged a strong enough relationship with the leaders and members of both parties that he could have called them together and reached a compromise and averted all of this because of the respect he would have built.

0bama doesn't know what leadership is, what compromise is, what relationships across the aisle are, nor does he care about any of that. All he is is an ideologue, easily the worst president in my lifetime which stretches abck to the Eisenhower administration.

Relationship building is a two-way street, and Republicans have made it crystal clear from the day he was elected that they have no interest in working with Obama on anything.

[blueballs]

To quote another empty chair leftist icon, "What difference does it make?"

There is one thing that has emerged yet again from the stalemate and that is the occupant of the "Spite House" is not a leader, has no interest in concensus building, is not president of all the people, and is nothing more than a partisan hack.

A true leader would have already forged a strong enough relationship with the leaders and members of both parties that he could have called them together and reached a compromise and averted all of this because of the respect he would have built.

0bama doesn't know what leadership is, what compromise is, what relationships across the aisle are, nor does he care about any of that. All he is is an ideologue, easily the worst president in my lifetime which stretches abck to the Eisenhower administration.

Relationship building is a two-way street, and Republicans have made it crystal clear from the day he was elected that they have no interest in working with Obama on anything.

Really??? You mean from day one when 0bama had a filibuster proof majority in the senate and a super majority in the house, the same time that they rammed the ACA down the throat of both the GOP and the rest of the nation without a single GOP vote and with no input from the GOP whatsoever?

Sorry, but that is a cop out. His JOB is to build relationships, concensus, solve problems and be an advocate of all the people- regardless of any preconceived attitude. That's what an executive and a leader does.

If somebody came into my office and told me they weren't producing because half of his target market didn't like him I'd tell him tough shit, it is your job to MAKE them like you or at least find common ground. 0bama has failed miserably in that area and that alone makes him a worse president than either Carter, Nixon, or Bush 2.

[GannonFan]

To quote another empty chair leftist icon, "What difference does it make?"

There is one thing that has emerged yet again from the stalemate and that is the occupant of the "Spite House" is not a leader, has no interest in concensus building, is not president of all the people, and is nothing more than a partisan hack.

A true leader would have already forged a strong enough relationship with the leaders and members of both parties that he could have called them together and reached a compromise and averted all of this because of the respect he would have built.

0bama doesn't know what leadership is, what compromise is, what relationships across the aisle are, nor does he care about any of that. All he is is an ideologue, easily the worst president in my lifetime which stretches abck to the Eisenhower administration.

Relationship building is a two-way street, and Republicans have made it crystal clear from the day he was elected that they have no interest in working with Obama on anything.

Well, to be fair, Obama has made it clear he's only interested in working together on the things he wants to see done, and his first year in office was pretty much a big middle finger to the opposition. I always said, the Dems getting a super majority in Obama's first year was a disaster for Obama - rather than coming in and being a transformational President, he took the easy way out and used his newfound strength in Congress, and he let Reid and Pelosi handle the tactics in doing so. It worked while he had a supermajority, but he didn't make any friends by doing so and the '10 elections were a big rebuke to that. The current GOP isn't really anything to be happy about, but it is, partially, a product of the politics at large.

[DSUrocks07]

Sent from my HTC One V using Tapatalk now Free

[dbackjon]

Ah yes, the alternative universe of liberalism and the MSM...One side is willing to negotiate, one side is not, but the one that is shoulders all the blame for the disagreement... makes perfect sense.

GOP - we are going to cut off your arms and your legs
Dems - like hell you will
GOP - ok - how about just one arm?
Dems - NO
GOP - see - they won't negotiate - it is all their fault.


Only a fucking moron wouldn't realize this is 100% on the GOP

[DSUrocks07]

Ah yes, the alternative universe of liberalism and the MSM...One side is willing to negotiate, one side is not, but the one that is shoulders all the blame for the disagreement... makes perfect sense.

GOP - we are going to cut off your arms and your legs
Dems - like hell you will
GOP - ok - how about just one arm?
Dems - NO
GOP - see - they won't negotiate - it is all their fault.


Only a **** moron wouldn't realize this is 100% on the GOP

Dems - Do what we want
GOP - No
Dems - Do what we want
GOP - Ok what about we do some of what you want?
Dems - Do what we want
GOP - Ok ok, fine but what about the sequester?
Dems - Do what we want

America - wtf?

[GannonFan]

Ah yes, the alternative universe of liberalism and the MSM...One side is willing to negotiate, one side is not, but the one that is shoulders all the blame for the disagreement... makes perfect sense.

GOP - we are going to cut off your arms and your legs
Dems - like hell you will
GOP - ok - how about just one arm?
Dems - NO
GOP - see - they won't negotiate - it is all their fault.


Only a **** moron wouldn't realize this is 100% on the GOP

How many things today are you blaming 100% on one side?

[dbackjon]

GOP - we are going to cut off your arms and your legs
Dems - like hell you will
GOP - ok - how about just one arm?
Dems - NO
GOP - see - they won't negotiate - it is all their fault.


Only a **** moron wouldn't realize this is 100% on the GOP

How many things today are you blaming 100% on one side?

As many times as needed.

[Skjellyfetti]

Lindsay Graham today:

"We won't be the last political party to overplay our hand," he said. "It might happen one day on the Democratic side. And if it did, would Republicans, for the good of the country, kinda give a little? We really did go too far. We screwed up. But their response is making things worse, not better."

[YoUDeeMan]

Both sides contributed to it... but, House Republicans exacerbated the situation exponentially.

Once again, jellybean doesn't bother to read his own post.

The House reacted to Reid's continued shelving of any House proposals.

Now the Dems, after making sure they didn't do the same thing earlier, cry that the House has essentially shelved any Senate proposals.

[YoUDeeMan]

Relationship building is a two-way street, and Republicans have made it crystal clear from the day he was elected that they have no interest in working with Obama on anything.

You've written a lot of stupid things but this might be the mostest stupidest, indeediest.

[BDKJMU]

Lindsay Graham today:

"We won't be the last political party to overplay our hand," he said. "It might happen one day on the Democratic side. And if it did, would Republicans, for the good of the country, kinda give a little? We really did go too far. We screwed up. But their response is making things worse, not better."

Linday Graham is an establishment RINO. Time to shake up the establishment and get rid of the phony RINOs.

[Grizalltheway]

Relationship building is a two-way street, and Republicans have made it crystal clear from the day he was elected that they have no interest in working with Obama on anything.

You've written a lot of stupid things but this might be the mostest stupidest, indeediest.

Really, cuck? Please show me one instance in which the Repubs have demonstrated that they're willing to work with Obama for the good of the country. Don't hurt yourself thinking too hard.

[SeattleGriz]

So well is a moron

This is 100% on the idiotic teabaggers

Racist.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4

[houndawg]

Nothing to see here folks. The insurance companies preserve their right to put their profits ahead of your health. Carry on.




Single payer now.

[AZGrizFan]

You've written a lot of stupid things but this might be the mostest stupidest, indeediest.

Really, cuck? Please show me one instance in which the Repubs have demonstrated that they're willing to work with Obama for the good of the country. Don't hurt yourself thinking too hard.

Show me one instance where Obama hasn't just dug in his heels and refused to negotiate. One will suffice. Obama showed his true colors when he let that abortion of a bill called Obamacare go through on a straight party-line vote. He essentially said "fuck you" to 49% of America that day and has continue to do so for 5 straight years. The cherry on top was the day he callously reminded John McCain in a White House meeting that "I won, remember?".

He's a fucking ass who has run this country so far down a rabbit hole there'll be no recovering it. The Republican Party is fractured, and it's probably a good thing. They can't get a president elected, so the failure of this once-great country will go down in the history books as the most colossal of Democratic Party fuckups.